The Ecological Ideal Free Distribution and Distributed Networked Control Systems

  • Jorge Finke
  • Kevin M. Passino

Abstract

In this paper we first establish an analogy where we view both animals and vehicles as generic agents. We introduce a model of the ecological behavior of a group of agents and establish sufficient conditions for the group to achieve an ideal free distribution (IFD), even when we lift some of the “ideal” and “free” assumptions. Finally, we apply this model to cooperative vehicle control problems and present simulation results that show the benefits of an IFD-based distributed decision-making strategy.

Bibliography

  1. [1]
    ABRAHAMS, M.V., “Patch choice under perceptual constraints: A case for departures from an ideal free distribution”, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 70 (1986), 999–1007.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    ASTROM, M., “Travel cost and the ideal free distribution”, OIKOS 69 (1994), 516–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    FINKE, J., K. M. PASSINO, S. GANAPATHY, and A. SPARKS, “Modeling and analysis of cooperative control systems for uninhabited autonomous vehicles”, Cooperative Control, (S. MORSE, N. LEONARD, AND V. Kumar eds.). Springer-Verlag (2004).Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    FRETWELL, S.D., and H.L. LUCAS, “On territorial bahavior and other factors indluencing distribution in birds”, Acta Biotheorica 19 (1970), 16–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    GIL, A., S. GANAPATHY, K.M. PASSINO, and Andrew Sparks, “Cooper-ative scheduling of tasks for networked autonomous vehicles”, Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (Hawaii), (2003).Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    KORONA, R., “Travel cost and the ideal free distribution of ovipositing female flour beetles, Tribolium confusum”, Animal Behavior 40 (1990), 186–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    LESSELLS, C.M., “Putting resource dynamics into continuous input ideal free distribution models”, Animal Behavior 49 (1995), 487–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    MILINSKI, M., “Competitive resource sharing: An experimental test for a lerning rule for ESSs”, Animal Behavior 32 (1984), 233–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    MORRIS, D.W., “Spatial scale and the cost of density-dependent habitat selection”, Evolutionary Ecology 1 (1987), 379–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    PARKER, G.A., “The reproductive behaviour and the nature of sexual selection in scatophaga stercoraria”, Evolution 28 (1974), 93–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    PARKER, G.A., and W. SUTHERLAND, “Ideal free distributions when indi-viduals differ in competitive ability: phenotype-limited ideal free models”, Animal Behavior 34 (1986), 1223–1242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    PASSINO, K. M., and K. BURGESS, Stability Analysis of Discrete Event Systems, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., NY (1998).Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    SMITH, J.M., Evolution and the Theory of Games, Cambridge: Cambridge Univeristy Press Cambridge, UK (1982).MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    SUBRAMANIAN, S.K., and J.B. CRUZ, “Predicting pop up threats from an adaptive markov model”, Proceedings of the Conference on cooperative control and optimization (Gainsville, FL), (Dec. 2002), 127–147.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    SUTHERLAND, W., From Individual Behaviour to Population Ecology, Oxford: University Press New York (1996).Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    SUTHERLAND, W., “Aggregation and the ideal free distribution”, Journal of Animal Ecology 52 (1983), 821–828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    TREGENZA, T., “Building on the ideal free distribution”, Advances in Ecological Research 26 (1995), 253–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jorge Finke
    • 1
  • Kevin M. Passino
    • 1
  1. 1.The Ohio State UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations